Now we are talking! I have given this some thought and it boils down to what you want to achieve for recording purposes and how far up the aerobatic scale you want to go.

A lot of these FPV planes are capable of simple and sometimes even complex aerobatics but the more equipment that cram into them they become too heavy and under powered for the more complicated flying.

My Skywalker is pretty nimble and can do most basic aerobatics like loops, rolls and spins very well but I run a very light and basic setup with no frills. I think a lot of the Skywalkers out there are quite a bit heavier than mine and probably would be a hand full and/or break in a some aerobatic situations. Vid with rolls and aerobatic-ish flying with my SW:

The main reason I use a Skywalker is that it can carry a full size GoPro and other video equipment and primarily because the prop is in the back and out of the way of the camera. If you did not care about the prop then you can FPV with any aerobatic plane you felt comfortable putting FPV gear on. That 3D plane you mentioned would be a good option (i would prefer the actual Telink version versus the clone - http://www.telink.eu/). As soon as I wipe out my Skywalker one of my 48" Extreme Flight planes is going FPV flying just for fun

I think the more you go up the aerobatics complication ladder the more head tracking/pan-tilt becomes important. I have had one crash where I was turning faster than my FOV could see what was coming around the corner. Pan-tilt/head tracking would have prevented that and would become doubly important in 3D!

However, because I still have a need for the video camera to be free from prop arcs I have looked at some of these as a next option:

The problem with the above IMO is that with the pointy nose birds you are going to significantly mess up the aerodynamics with big protruding cameras. None of them are particularly 3D. Twins are PITA IMO (added complication at least).

OK, I have a 9v onboard FPV system. can I run this on strait 3s? without a 9v regulator or do you think a 2s would work since it's just a bit short fully charged? (8.4v). I can use 9v batteries but I would much rather use a 2s lipo since I have several. If I need a 3s I'll buy a little 600mah but that would be 12.6v seems a bit much for a 9v system without regulation. But I am wondering if the camera and tx are like the rx. it works with anything from 9v-12v. so it will work on a 2 or 3s battery but works better on a 3s. I don't want to burn up my camera and tx testing it out though so hopefully someone might have some insight.

Do you carry a handheld or somesuch to check that no one is on your frequency before transmitting video? Seems to me it would be proper to listen for a few minutes and maybe call CQ before stepping on the frequency for a solid 30+ minutes. Then again these are very low power transmissions so another operator would have to be pretty close by to get any QRM from it.

I simply turn on my ground station and scan for interference with my TX off. My DIY antenna tracker automatically locates nearby transmissions, but anybody else could just scan the field with their antenna manually. Our bands are ATV (Amatuer TV) bands and used mainly for video transmission. Thus if you see nothing, then you are unlikely to step on another person's transmission.

Ok guys here is my noob question
all my rc gear is 2.4 Now I was planing on using 800mw 900mhz video system and my gopro hd camera but I am trying to place my order for all my gear and having a hard time picking goggles. I like the headplay ones because they are 720p but they are wired so than I was looking at the Fat Shark 5.8GHz RCV922 Aviator Edition ones from readymaderc.com but will they hook up to my 900mhz video reciver? if so how Thanks

If you don't plan on using the 5.8GHz internal reciever you shouldn't buy those. The BASE version is less expensive.

However, why can't you use the HP? Wired, do you mean power supply or video? If it's power you can solve that by using an extra battery to power the goggles. If it's video then it's no different from the Fatsharks, you will still need to use an external 900MHz VRx and have a video wire between the VRx and the goggles. In any case I wouldn't buy the other goggles, I would keep the HP.

I meant is there a way to hook the Fatshark 5.8 transmiter to my900mhz VRx so the signal would come from the plane into my 900mhz reciver then sent back out through the 5.8ghz Fatshark transmiter to my goggles this way I am not wired to my base station?

I meant is there a way to hook the Fatshark 5.8 transmiter to my900mhz VRx so the signal would come from the plane into my 900mhz reciver then sent back out through the 5.8ghz Fatshark transmiter to my goggles this way I am not wired to my base station?

Connect the ouptut from your 900MHz system to the 5.8 video Tx...voila, wireless goggles! Now you can have huge 900 Mhz anetnnas, Rx, trackers, diversity, laptops, and all the other kung-fu everyone seems to have these days and not trip all over yourself.

Connect the ouptut from your 900MHz system to the 5.8 video Tx...voila, wireless goggles! Now you can have huge 900 Mhz anetnnas, Rx, trackers, diversity, laptops, and all the other kung-fu everyone seems to have these days and not trip all over yourself.

Unfortunatly I can't get it to work at all!! I am useing a 9v until I get a voltage regulator but no dice. The reciever comes on but I cannot get the tx and camera to send the signal. I don't know which is broken becouse there are no "power lights" on either??? can anyone help me? any ideas?

Many of us have told FPV hobby that that splitter is totally bogus. They even had the nerve to Email me and ask why they were getting flamed about it yet still claim it as "diversity". It is total crap and anyone who would rip off others like that won't get a dime from me.

Here's what I told Andan in response to his asking "why bother with diversity? Why not this stub?":

It is actually about far worse than one antenna. Here's why:

First, the RX is looking for a 50 ohm impedance. Two 50 ohm antennas in parallel would be 25 ohm impedance. This equates to a 3db drop in performance right off from the start.

The other problem is interference. The signal will be received at separate times at different signal strengths. Even if the signal hits both antennas at exactly the same time and in phase (which will not happen by the way) the directional antenna has several feet of coaxial cable that slows the transmission of the signal on it's way to the RX, thus delaying the signal several cycles causing guaranteed destructive interference.